Establishing a Capacity for Ecotoxicological Monitoring

Part of a Pesticide Action Network (PAN) project:

Pesticides and Poverty:
Implementing Chemical Conventions for safe and just development

Client: PAN-UK (Pesticide Action Network UK)

Donor: EU – Program on Environment in Developing Countries

Partners: PAN-UK; PAN-Africa (Senegal); Agenda (Tanzania)

Project Management:Colin Tingle

Training Team: Colin Tingle, Ian Grant, Bob Douthwaite, John Cox, Mark Ritchie, Ken Campbell, Stephane Flasse,Ian Watson

Time: 2006-2008

Following the four Training of Trainers (ToT) sessions during 2006/7, three follow-up mini-projects were selected from a range of potential projects submitted by ex-participants on the ecotox ToTs. A team from the NR Group provided technical support (at a distance) to these three projects, all of which focussed on collecting data from rural communities on their use, perception and knowledge of pesticides and spreading awareness of the environmental and health impacts of pesticides built by participants during the ecotox ToT sessions.

The mini-projects began in late 2007 and finished in early 2008.

A report relating to the technical assistance provided by the NR Group to the ecotox follow-up mini-projects in Mali, Tanzania and Ethiopia is posted on the PAN-UK website. The NR Group role in the project is now complete.

Reports

Background to the Project

External links:

As part of a Pesticide Action Network (PAN) project in 4 African countries: Pesticides and Poverty: Implementing Chemical Conventions for safe and just development (see www.pan-uk.org), theNRgroup have provided (along with regional partners) training of trainers in ecotoxicological monitoring methods.

The training of trainers in ecotoxicological monitoring methods in each country was based on experience in the field and the publication: Grant, I.F. & Tingle, C.C.D (eds.) 2002. Ecological monitoring methods for the assessment of pesticide impacts in the tropics. Handbook and Methods sheets. CTA, The Netherlands.

Get it from
Development Bookshop,
or from CTA

Training sessions were held in Benin, Ethiopia, Senegal, and Tanzania, where PAN-UK project partners worked in close collaboration with the project manager from the NR Group in the development and organisation of trainings. Training in Tanzania and Ethiopia took place during August and September 2006. Follow-up activities will take place during 2007. Francophone training sessions in Senegal and Benin took take place during January, February and early March 2007. The training of trainers in Senegal differed slightly from all the others and was a truly international event in that it included participants from Marocco, Tunisia, Mali, Burundi and Guinea Bissau, as well as from the host country.

The training of trainers (ToT) met its aim of providing personnel from African NGOs/government departments / academia / agencies with an introduction to methodologies for monitoring pesticide impacts in tropical habitats directly relevant to them.

The training concentrated on use of the Handbook to train others appropriately.

Following the ToT sessions, participants will be able to help build capacity within local communities and other interested organisations in carrying out a field-based pesticide ecotoxicological monitoring. ToT will provide trainers with an understanding of the complex of issues that need to be addressed in establishing and running a valid ecotoxicological monitoring programme. They will also understand the principles behind the range of simple field methods which can be used in monitoring the non-target effects of pesticides and awareness will be raised of the specific additional expertise required in carrying out a successful monitoring – the possibilities for accessing this expertise locally will be outlined.

Results of the training courses

All the training courses have now been completed: Tanzania (27 August – 7 September 2006); Ethiopia (13-24 September 2006); Senegal (29 January – 10 February 2007); Benin (19 February – 3 March 2007).

The two francophone Training of trainers were carried out by members of the NRGroup and local experts from CERES/Locustox. The training session were well received by participants in both countries. A multiple choice assessment showed an average improvement in the results of participants in excess of 20% in both countries. A brief report on the west african training courses will be posted here shortly.

Senegal Training of Trainers participants and trainers outside CERES/Locustox lab, Dakar, Senegal — Senegal Training of Trainers
participants and trainers outside CERES/Locustox lab, Dakar, Senegal

Training of Trainers in East Africa

Summary

The training of trainers in pesticide ecotoxicology is the key component of Activity 3 of the PAN-UK Pesticides & Poverty Project: Documenting and communicating environmental impacts. Funding was provided by the EC program on Environment in Developing Countries and by the Africa Stockpiles Programme managed by WWF, Nairobi .
Training for trainers sessions in ecotoxicological monitoring methods were provided to 17 participants in Tanzania and to 17 Participants in Ethiopia . The participants in both countries were a mix of academics, government personnel and NGO staff.
The focus of the 2 training programmes was different. In Tanzania , the focus was on ecotoxicological monitoring to enable accurate, scientifically valid completion of Environmental Incident Report Forms under the Rotterdam (PIC) Convention. Endosulfan was the focal pesticide. In Ethiopia , the focus was an introduction to establishment of ecotoxicological monitoring programmes for the detection of environmental impacts from pesticides. The focal pesticides were DDT, 2,4-D and Malathion. In both cases, these foci were identified by partner organisations in country prior to the design of the training programmes.
In both countries, local representatives provided presentations on the major International Conventions and their implementation in their country. All other presentations and practical sessions were by members of the NR Group (Dr. Colin Tingle [CT]; Prof. Ian Grant [IG]; Mr. John Cox [JC]) and covered an introduction to pesticide ecotoxicology, environmental services and human wellbeing [CT]; an introduction to the design and establishment of ecotoxicological monitoring programmes [CT]; operator safety, including protective clothing and equipment for lab and field work [JC]; the importance of environmental parameters in pesticide ecotoxicology [IG]; Sampling methods for pesticide residue analysis (with an emphasis on aquatic systems) [JC]; sampling methods for aquatic invertebrates [IG]; sampling methods for terrestrial invertebrates (Tanzania only) [CT]. Practical field work sessions were provided on sampling within an aquatic system (lake) for residue analysis [JC]; sampling aquatic invertebrates to detect pesticide impacts [IG]; measurement of environmental parameters [IG]; and (in Tanzania) sampling methods for terrestrial invertebrates to detect pesticide impacts [CT].
In both countries, a fictional case study was used as the basis of an assignment in which participants worked in groups towards a presentation given on the last day of the course. The presentations then formed the focus for detailed discussion of issues arising from the completion of the assignment. This proved an extremely valuable learning experience for participants in both countries.
Multiple choice questionnaires were used to assess the learning resulting from the courses and showed an overall improvement in technical knowledge by participants of 18.6% in Tanzania and by 19% in Ethiopia.
Participant feedback forms demonstrated that the training was very well received in both countries. In Tanzania, >90% of participants rated all aspects of the training as “good” or “excellent”, except the accommodation, which the majority rated as “acceptable”. In Ethiopia , 100% of participants rated all aspects of the training as “good” or “excellent”.
Useful feedback was obtained from evaluation forms in both countries on what worked well and on possible improvements.
Lessons learned include: Trainers are confident that participants in both countries have grasped the fundamentals of pesticide ecotoxicology and would be able to train others by raising awareness of environmental effects of pesticides and how they can be detected. However, participants would need considerable practice and more experience before being able to train others in all aspects of the training they received.

Training of Trainers in West Africa

Summary

Training for trainers sessions in ecotoxicological monitoring methods were provided to 16 participants in Senegal (including organisers) and to 15 Participants in Benin (also including the organisers). The participants in both countries were a mix of academics, government personnel and NGO staff. In Senegal, participants came from Mali, Burundi, Guinea Bissau, Morocco and Tunisia, as well as Senegal; whilst the participants for the Benin training came from Benin and Niger. Both training of trainers sessions were conducted in french.
The focus of the 2 training programmes was different. In Senegal, the focus was an introduction to establishment of ecotoxicological monitoring programmes for the detection of environmental impacts from pesticides and an introduction to the PIC procedures (Rotterdam Convention). In Benin, the focus was on ecotoxicological monitoring to enable accurate, scientifically valid completion of Environmental Incident Report Forms (EIRFs) under the Rotterdam (PIC) Convention. Endosulfan was the focal pesticide identified by partner organisations in both countries prior to the design of the training programmes.
In both countries, local representatives provided presentations on the major International Conventions and their implementation in their country. All other presentations and practical sessions were by members of the NR Group (Dr. Colin Tingle [CT]); and CERES/Locustox (Mr. Alpha Oumar Diallo [AOD]; Mr. Baba Gadji [BG]; Dr. Makhfousse Sarr [MS] and Mr. Ibrahima Ndour [IND]) with a contribution from Mr. Demba Dia [DD] of the Plant Protection Department (DPV) and covered an introduction to pesticide ecotoxicology, environmental services and human wellbeing [CT]; an introduction to the design and establishment of ecotoxicological monitoring programmes [CT]; operator safety, including protective clothing and equipment for lab and field work [IND/CT]; pesticides and formulations [BG]; application technology and calibration and its influence on environmental contamination [DD/AOD]; the importance of environmental parameters in pesticide ecotoxicology [MS/AOD]; sampling methods for pesticide residue analysis (with an emphasis on aquatic systems) [BG]; sampling methods for aquatic invertebrates [AOD]; Practical field work sessions were provided on sampling for residue analysis within aquatic systems (seasonal lake (Senegal) and seasonal river (Benin)) [BG]; sampling aquatic invertebrates within aquatic systems (lake (Senegal & Benin) & seasonal river (Benin)) to detect pesticide impacts [AOD]; measurement of environmental parameters [MS/AOD]; and Field Bioassay on fenitrothion, including spray equipment calibration, spray droplet deposition, field bioassay for aquatic invertebrates, sampling methods for terrestrial invertebrates (Senegal only) [AOD/DD/MS/BG/IND/CT].
In both countries, a fictional case study was used as the basis of an assignment in which participants worked in groups towards a presentation given on the penultimate day of the course. The presentations then formed the focus for detailed discussion of issues arising from the completion of the assignment. This proved an extremely valuable learning experience for participants in both countries.
A Field demonstration of pesticide application, calibration of a micro-ulva spray applicator, spray deposition monitoring, field bioassay and collection of material for pesticide residue analysis included within the training programme in Senegal was a very valuable exercise for the ToT. However, its success rested on the fact that the CERES/Locustox team had a suitable site for this activity where they had carried out similar exercises as part of training activities on previous occasions. It is recommended that such an activity be included in future ecotox training sessions in the future, but only where a suitable site and relevant, experienced staff/trainers are available. Where such an activity is included, participant safety MUST be of the highest priority.
Multiple choice questionnaires were used to assess the learning resulting from the courses and showed an overall improvement in technical knowledge by participants of 24.2% in Senegal and by 27.5% in Benin.
Participant feedback forms demonstrated that the training was very well received in both countries. In Senegal, >75% of participants rated all aspects of the training as “good” or “excellent”, except the accommodation which the majority rated as “acceptable” but which was seen as poor by 30% of participants. In Benin, >75% of participants rated all aspects of the training as “good” or “excellent”, except the accommodation which 50% rated as “good” or “excellent” and 50% rated as “acceptable”.
Useful feedback was obtained from evaluation forms in both countries on what worked well and on possible improvements. Several suggestions made by participants in Senegal were taken up immediately for the training in Benin. However, many of the suggestions for improvement would only be possible with a significantly longer course and a larger budget.
Lessons to be learned include: The courses were felt to be too highly intensive by participants in both countries (but particularly in Benin) and needed to be of longer duration. Despite the planning visit, “management from a distance” was not entirely successful in ensuring that requisite preparations for the training were completed before arrival of trainers and the period between the training sessions in the 2 countries was too short to allow for preparations to be completed without significant stress on trainers and a remaining significant risk that training objectives would not be met; nonetheless, this risk was not realised in either country. The “management from a distance” is far from ideal and a longer “in-country” preparation time is desireable. Trainers are confident that participants in both countries have grasped the fundamentals of pesticide ecotoxicology, have a considerably raised awareness and understanding of the interaction between pesticide use, ecosystem health and human health and would be able to train others by raising awareness of environmental effects of pesticides and how they can be detected. Participants would clearly be ready to pass on training to others in accurate completion of PIC EIRFs. However, participants would need considerable practice and more experience before being able to train others in all aspects of the training they received.
Commitment to pass on the training to others (colleagues and work contacts) and to raise awareness of the environmental impacts of pesticides and the relationship between human and ecosystem wellbeing was made by participants from both training sessions. In Benin, a committee was established at the end of the ToT to manage information exchange across an “ecotoxicology network”. In Senegal, follow-up was discussed and an individual was nominated from each country represented to provide feedback to PAN-Africa on whether an in-country “ecotoxicology network” would be established and how the training would subsequently be followed up. PAN-Africa volunteered to establish and manage an “ecotoxicology information exchange group”: this was set up in early march. Participants agreed to develop proposals for future training and or ecotoxicological monitoring in their home countries. Concept notes would be submitted to PAN-UK (via PAN-Africa in Senegal and OBEPAB in Benin) for selection (with technical support from the NR Group) of the best for development into a full funding proposal. Other good concept notes would also receive support from PAN-UK to help proposers develop their ideas into funding proposals, where possible.